I don't Know if this question has been addressed earlier. If so I'd be grateful for a reference.

On a previous post MJ Thomas noted :

> The problem with the Queen's Chamber is that all
> of its four walls lean – the side (north and
> south) walls lean northward (at the east wall more
> so than at the west wall) and the end (east and
> west) walls lean into the Chamber.

The walls of the King's Chamber lean also and the blocks have been described as wrenched out of position "as if by an earthquake", cracking the granite roof beams. The builder's apparent intention was to create a granite box, and so a limestone gable was required to spread the vertical load of core masonry above it. But the King's Chamber has the same width to be bridged as the Queen's and I have not understood why 5 "relieving chambers" were required in the former. The north and south walls have been described as " free standing" for a height of almost 40 cubits. Not being a construction engineer I do not understand how these multiple chambers might actually be an advantage, but a single gable would surely have made for a stronger construction, especially considering its proximity to the Grand Gallery?
If these chambers really are unnecessary as a means of "relief", what other purpose could they have served? Do they provide an insight into Egyptian thinking on "stress analysis?

poundr17